One Article Review
| Source |  Network World |
|---|---|
| Identifiant | 254472 |
| Date de publication | 2016-11-15 07:50:00 (vue: 2016-11-15 07:50:00) |
| Titre | Goodbye, NAC. Hello, software-defined perimeter |
| Texte | Those of us who've been around security technology for a while will remember the prodigious rise of network access control (NAC) around 2006. Now, the ideas around NAC had been around for several years beforehand, but 2006 gave us Cisco's network admission control (aka Cisco NAC), Microsoft's network access protection (NAP) and then a whole bunch of venture-backed NAC startups (ConSentry, Lockdown Networks, Mirage Networks, etc.).There were lots of reasons why the industry was gaga over NAC at the time, but it really came down to two major factors: Broad adoption of WLANs. In 2006, wireless networking based upon 802.11 was transforming from a novelty to the preferred technology for network access. I also believe laptop sales first overtook desktop computer sales around this same timeframe, so mobility was becoming an IT staple as well. Many organizations wanted a combination of NAC and 802.1X so they could implement access policies and monitor who was accessing the network. A wave of internet worms. The early 2000s produced a steady progression of internet worms, including Code Red (2001), Nimda (2001), SQL Slammer (2003), Blaster (2003), Bagel (2004), Sasser (2004), Zotob (2005), etc. These worms could easily spread across an entire enterprise network from a single PC as soon as a user logged on. NAC was seen as a solution to this problem by providing point-to-point PC inspection and authentication over Layer 2 before systems were granted Layer 3 network access. NAC really was a good idea, but the space was over invested and many of the products were difficult to deploy and manage. As a result, NAC enthusiasm faded, although NAC deployment was making slow but steady progress. As NAC became a niche product, it lost its panache. Heck, my friends at Gartner even killed the NAC MQ when there were few vendors left and not much to write about.To read this article in full or to leave a comment, please click here |
| Envoyé | Oui |
| Condensat | 2000s 2001 2003 2004 2005 2006 802 about access accessing across admission adoption also although around article authentication backed bagel based became becoming been before beforehand believe blaster broad bunch but came cisco click code combination comment computer consentry control could defined deploy deployment desktop difficult down early easily enterprise enthusiasm entire etc even factors: faded first friends from full gaga gartner gave good goodbye granted had heck hello here idea ideas implement including industry inspection internet invested its killed laptop layer leave left lockdown logged lost lots major making manage many microsoft mirage mobility monitor much nac nap network networking networks niche nimda not novelty now organizations over overtook panache perimeter please point policies preferred problem prodigious produced product products progress progression protection providing read really reasons red remember result rise sales same sasser security seen several single slammer slow software solution soon space spread sql staple startups steady systems technology then these those time timeframe transforming two upon user vendors venture wanted wave well when who whole why will wireless wlans worms write years zotob â in â the |
| Tags | |
| Stories | APT 15 |
| Notes | |
| Move | 
|
L'article ne semble pas avoir été repris aprés sa publication.
L'article ne semble pas avoir été repris sur un précédent.